HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979 01-11 PCP PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
REGULAR SESSION
January 11 , 1979
1 . Call to Order 1978 Commission: 8:00 p.m.
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes: December 21 , 1978
4. Adjourn 1978 Commission
5. Administer Oath of Office
6. Call_ to Order 1979 _Commi-ssion: Approximately 8:15 p.m.
7. Roll Call
8. Annual Election of Chairman and Chairman Pro tem
9. Chairman's Explanation: The Planning Commission is an advisory body. One
of the Commission's functions is to hold public
hearings. In the matters concerned in these hear-
ings, the Commission makes recommendations to the
City Council . The City Council makes all final
decisions on these matters.
10. Ken Bergstrom - - -79001 Rezoning, from C2 (Co^°rerci al ) to R4 (Mul ti pl e
Family Residential ) , of the property in the
1300 block south of 69th Avenue North (east of
the Humboldt Square Shopping Center)
11 . Janis Biumentals for B.C.I..P. 79002
Site and Building Plan approval for an
approximate 85,000 sq. ft. speculative building
at 67th Avenue North and Shingle Creek Parkway.
12. Harold J. Westin and Associates 79003
Site and Building Plan approval for an
approximate 7,700 sq. ft. addition to the
Group Health Clinic at 6845 Lee Avenue North.
13. Discussion Items:
a) Review Proposed 1979 Meeting Schedule
b) Designate Commission Liaison to Neighborhood Groups
c) Neighborhood Group Meetings
14. Other Business
15. Adjournment
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 79001
,pl icant: Kenneth Bergstrom
Location: 1300 Block south of 69th Avenue North
Request: Rezoning
Zee applicant proposes rezoning from C-2 (Commerce) to R-4 (Multiple Family
Residential ) of the approximate 3 acre tract located in the 1.300 block south of
69th Avenue North. The property is bounded on the west by the Humboldt Square
Shopping Center; on the north by 69th Avenue North and the City's Public Utilities
building; on the east by single family residential homes facing Emerson Avenue
HDrth amd on the south by a number of R6 Multiple Family Residential dwellings.
The__aapplicant has submitted a letter to the file requesting the rezoning. He
indicates in the letter that the site in question has remained undeveloped over
the years under its current C-2 zoning "because of the apparent lack of. a need
for additional shopping centers -in the area." He is requesting the rezoning for 4
the purpose of-building quadra homes which he claims would furnish the need for
additional medium-priced housing. He also notes tha t this concept would provide
an attractive buffer between the existing single family homes and the Humboldt
Square Shopping Center. Permitted -uses in the R4 Zoning Distr ict include Multiple
Family Dwellings of one and one-half or two stories in height; R3 uses (Townhouses
or Garden Apartments and Condominium Single Family Attached Dwelling Units) provided
such uses adhere to the district requirements that prevail a.ny_R3 .Zoning District;
and accessory uses incidental to permitted or special uses.
T-he City's Comprehensive Plan (Page 49) calls for a site at the- center of the.
ibrtheast Neighborhood to be retained as commercial for purposes of .ultimate
®` development as a neighborhood business center. The subject site and the present
Humboldt Square Shopping Center is the area designated for the location for such
a facility. The Plan also states that it is important that the development of the
shopping center be designed as an integrated unit rather than permitting individual
stores to be built in a piecemeal, unrelated fashion.
The same applicant had requested a rezoning of the subject property from C-2
(Commerce) to R-1 (Single Family Residential ) under Application No. 77011 in, March,
1"977 (Planning Commission and City Council minutes attached). . The Planning Commis-
sion, at that time, had revier€ed the Comprehensive Plan inconsistencies of that m
proposed rezoning and recommended through Planning Commission Resolution No. 77-2
(attached) that the Comprehensive Plan be amended to provide for the development y
of single family housing on the remaining developable land in the southeast
quadrant of -69th and Humboldt Avenues North based upon .the :following findings:
1 . The Northeast Neighborhood is adequately served by shopping
facilities, both within and near the neighborhood.
2. The Comprehensive Plan designation of this area for future
development as a neighborhood shopping center has been satisfied.
with the existing retail center.
3. There is substantial vacant commercial land elsewhere in the
Northeast Neighborhood.
4. The owner has initiated a rezoning, from C-2 (General Commerce)
to R-1 (Single Family Residential ), of the approximate 8'acre
parcel described as Lot 2, Block 1, Hi Crest Square Addition.
Application No. 79001
Page 2
f
5. The proposed use represents a reasonable use of the land and
is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan development goal for
the Northeast Neighborhood.
_The ;Planning Commission, at that time, also recommended rezoning of the area
through Planning Commission Resolution No. 77-3 (attached) for the followi g
reasons
1. There is need for additional R-1 zoned land in the the Northeast
.Neighborhood, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan recommend-
ation that single family residential development be the pre-
dominant characteristic. of this neighborhood.
2. The existing Humboldt Square retail center adequately serves
the neighborhood as a centrally located shopping center.
3. There is no perceived need for additional C-2 development in
this area.
4. The owner has proposed the zoning change which represents a
reasonable use classification of the property.
S. The Commission, pursuant to Chapter 35-202, has recommended
.appropriate amendment of the Comprehensive Plan goals for
this area in- Commission Resolution No. 77-2.
"The 'City Council record of the review of this request indicates that the Council
.,was inclined to amend the Comprehensive Plan and- approve the rezoning to R.-1 as
recommended by the Planning Commission, but continued consideration of the Com-
:prehensive Plan amendment and the rezoning until the applicant had submitted a
;proposal to the City Manager which showed positive buffering of the property in
question from the Humboldt Square Shopping Center. The screening plans were
never submitted by Mr. Bergstrom and the rezoning was never approved. In n
April , 1978 letter, Mr. Bergstrom formally requested the withdrawal of the re-
zoning request which was acknowledged by the City Council on April 24, 197
Another aspect of the review of this matter that bears closer scrutiny is the -
Comprehensive Plan Coal Statement (Page 48) to "make single family detache '
ftusing the predominant character of the Northeast Neighborhood." A March, 1978
land use inventory of the City indicates single family detached dwellings Gni
prised 48.5% of the total number of dwellings of the Northeast Neighborhood.
wrthouses and Multiple Family Apartments together comprised 51 .4% of the total
raber of dwellings in the Northeast Neighborhood. We are in the process Df
dating this inventory and hope to have the results by. Thursday's Commission
ti ng.
A copy of the Rezoning Evaluation Policy and Review Guidelines contained in
Section 35-208 of the City Ordinances is attached for your review. The merits
of a ;rezoning request must be reviewed against this policy and these guidelines.
1-i1-79
Application No. 79001
'age 3
The staff met with the applicant and a developer in December regarding this site
and potential development. We discussed briefly density requirements and a
possible layout for the quadra home concept. They indicated they would sub it
conceptual plans regarding their proposal, along with the rezoning applicati n to
better illustrate a proposed development to meet R4 Zoning District require ents.
To date, we have not received such plans to comment on.
A public hearing has been scheduled and notices have been sent.
Recommendation
It is established Commission policy to refer all rezonings and Comprehensive Plan
review matters to the appropriate Neighborhood Advisory Group which is, in this
instance, the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group. The Commission should dis-
cuss the merits of the proposal and the various planning concerns, and then
table the matter for further review and input by the Northeast Neighborhood
r
1-11-79
LERCrSTROM REALTY COMPANY
3401 85th Ave. No.
Minneapolis, Minn. 55443
Plannin g P& Inspection Department
P
630.1 Shingle Creek Parkway
City of Brooklyn Center, Minn. 55430
ATTENTION: Ron 'r7arren
Gentlemen:
We herewith submit our proposal- for rezoning from-the existing
C-2 to R-4 the following property;
That part of Lot 2, Block 1, Highcrest Square
lying east of Register Land Survey 1312.
(S± Acres immediately east of Humboldt Square. )
This site has remained undeveloped because of the apparent
lack of need for additional shopping centers in the area.
• We request rezoning to R-4, and propose building quadrahomes
on this site. Quadrahomes would be a new concept in tree area. ;
This type of building would furnish the need fcr additional
medium-priced housing. The new concept would provide an
attractive buffer between the existing single family homes
and shopping center.,
Respectfully submitted,
BERGSTROM REALTY COMPANY
y .3 °
!Kenneth L. Be rgstrom
faro
- Section J fir''• S i�iS.iaV 1 �+? i V, :.Cir�1l.�.s'...''Z F V.i.�L.a i Y'kL'a a tis V i.L V V �:- ,�i 'L:+a2v:L_..: .. -
1. E O�� -
The City Council finds -that effective maintenance of -the compr hensi;re
y nhng and rand use clas✓ifi-ca-tiors is enhanced through uniform and equitable
• evaluation of periodic proposed changes -to -this Zoni.^.g Ordinance; and for this
purpose, by the adoption of pesoiation No. 77-167, the City Council has establisnea
rezoning evaluation police and review guidelines.
2. policy.
It is the policy of the City -that: a) zoning classifications must be.
consistent with the Cor.:prehensive plan, and b) rezoning proposals shall not
ConsUt.ute "spot zoning," defined as a zoning decision which discril''_inat s in
favor of a particular landowner, and does not rel3.te to the Co
,m:prah�rsive Plan -
.
or to accepted planing principles.
3 Procedure.
-- ach rezoning proposal will.be considered on its merits, mEas• dd`
3galnst the above policy and against -these guidelines which may be we S
C61
lectively or individually as deemed by the City. K
4. uideU;e
is there a clear and"public need,or benefit? '.
- Cb).- is the proposed zoning consistent with and compatible with
- • -• surrounding land use classifications?
_ 14c) Can all perrsitted uses in the proposed zoning dis"trt c�be
- critemplated for developrrment of the subject property?
Have -there been substantial physical or zoning classification_
- Changes -in -the area since -the subject-property
was zoned?
• ' �ej "the case of City-initiated rezoning proposals i5 there 3
7 In goad public purpose evident?
Will the subject property bear fully the ordinance development
. restrictions for the proposed zoning districts?
• (g) s the subject property generally unsuited for uses permi ed in
i
the present zoning district, with respect to size, config
ration,
topography o.- location?
} Will the rezoning result-in the expansion of a zoning district,
- warranted by: 1) Comprehensive Planning; 2) the lack of
-developable land in -the proposed zoning dis'tr'ict; or 3)` 'the
best interests of the community?
Does -the proposal demonstrate merit beyond the interes s of an
• a%Arner or owners of an individual parcel?
Application No. 77011 The next item of business was consideration of Appli-
(Kenneth Bergstrom) cation No. 77011 submitted by Mr. Kenneth Bergstrom.
The item was introduced by the Secretary who presented
slides and stated the applicant propose rezoning,
from C-2 to R-1, of the approximate-8 acre vacant
parcel immediately east of the Humboldt Square Shop
ping Center in the southeast quadrant of 69th and
Humboldt Avenue North. He stated this and and the
Humboldt Square Center property have been planned
since at least a 1961 Northeast Neighborhood Study, as
the central location of a neighborhood shopping center.
He stated this site was so designated because it is
in the center of the Northeast Neighborhood and that
one of the stated policies of the Comprehensive Plan
• was "to provide a neighborhood shopping center for
each of the six residential neighborhoods, unless the
residents are adequately served by community or re-
gional shopping centers located nearby. '
He also stated there have been numerous speculative
proposals to develop -all or parts of this property;
and most of the speculative proposals have advocated
the piecemeal type of development admonished by the
Comprehensive Plan which encouraged an •Integrated
type of commercial center. He stated tie net result
over the years was the Humboldt Square enter which, .
since its construction approximately fo r years ago,
has yet to realize a full occupancy.
The Secretary stated the Commission should consider
that a zoning less than C-2 but higher than R-I
might be appropriate for at least porti ns of this
property, such as an R-3 or R-4 designation in the
• westerly portion to serve as an intermediate land use
between the shopping center and the single family
homes.
The Secretary commented that a stated g al of the.
Comprehensive Plan was "to make single family detached
housing the predominant character of the Northeast
-Neighborhood." He stated a March, 1976 land use in-
ventory of the City indicates single family detached
dwellings comprise approximately 48.5% of the .total
number of dwellings in the Northeast Neighborhood.
He stated that townhouses and multi-family dwellings
together comprised approximately 51 .4% of the total
number of dwellings. He said the parcel if rezoned
R-1, could- be subdivided into approximately 22 .single
family dwelling units, thus increasing the number of
single family detached homes in the neighborhood by
about 1%.
Chairman Scott recognized Mr. Murray, who represented
the applicant, and stated the applican felt R-I
represented the best use of the land, and that it was
apparent commercial development was nol feasible. He
stated the applicant had owned the property for
several years and had observed numerous attempts to
develop the property commercially.
-7- 3-10-77
. Chairf�ian Scott then announced that a public hearing Public Hearin
bad been scheduled and that approximately 46 neigh-
baring rroperty owners within 350 feet of the property
hud been notified. She recognized 4 neighboring
property owners: residents of 6733, 6813, 6807 and
liX5'25 Emerson Avenue North, who stated they were in
vor of the proposed rezoning. Chairman Scott noted
..:iat no other property owners were present or desired.
to be heard.
Motion by Commissioner Foreman seconded by Commissioner Close Public Fearing
Horan to close the public hearing.
Chairman Scott stated it seemed there were three basic
issues: t�,hether the existing C-2 zoning for purposes
of reserving an area for a neighborhood shopping
facility was desirable; whether the proposed R-1 zoning
in whole or in part was the highest and best use of the
property; and if it were determined that R-1 , in whole
or in part, was the highest and best use, what type of
buffering should be provided against the existing C-2
use.
Commissioner Horan inquired as to possible screening
devices that could be used for buffering. The Secret-
ary responded that a variety of things such as berming,
fencing or walls, or a combination thereof were pos-
sible. He stated that specific buffering devices
would be most appropriately considered when and if the
property were stjhdivided for a residential development.
&,.nmissiover Foreman inquired as to the price range
of the proposed homes in the area. Mr. Murray re-
sponded stating that the concept was to provide large
lots so that homes comparable to those in the vicinity
could be built.
Following further discussion Chairman Scott explained
that it was established Commission policy to refer re-
zoning matters to the neighborhood group for review and
comment..
Motion by Commissioner Foreman, seconded by Commissioner Table Application No. -
Jacobson to table Application No. 77011 and refer the 77011 and Refer to
matter to the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group Northeast Neighborhood
for review and comment. Motion passed unanimously. Advisory Grou
Y' .
Continued Consideration of The next item of business wa% consideration of
Application No. 77011 Application No. 77011 submitted by Mr. Kenneth
(Kenneth Bergstrom) Bergstrom, -The item Was introduced by the Secretary
who stated the applicant proposes rezoning, from C-2
to R-1, of the approximate eight acre tract located
immediately east of the Humboldt Square Shopping
Center. He stated the item was considered at public
• hearing on-March 10, 1977, and was tab ed so that
it could be-'r' eferred for further review and comment
by the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group.
He stated the Group has submitted the minutes of its
meeting on march 22, 1977, and that all members
•• present were in favor of the rezoning.
The Secretary explained that', should- the Commission
determine that there is merit' in the rezoning request
which represents a major zoning change it is man-
datory that the Comprehensive Plan be amended. He
stated the Comprehensive Plan calls fo this area
to be zoned commercial for purposes of ultimate de-
velopment as a neighborhood shopping center. He
further commented that the Plan states this area,
because of its central location in the neighborhood,
represents the most desirable area for a commercial
center unless it is determined the neighborhood is
adequately served by existing or nearby shopping
facilities.
+ An extensive discussion ensued, and in response to
a question by Chairman Scott, the Secretary stated
that the Zoning Ordinance in Section 3)-202 provides
for specific procedures which must be ollowed
before a recommended amendment to the omprehensive
Plan can be forwarded to the City Coun it
Chairman Scott stated that she could support the
request and the amendmeriL to the Comprehensive Plan
in light of the following:
1. Humboldt Square Shopping Center adequately
serves the Northeast Neighborhood.
2. There is a need for additional R-1 land
in the-Northeast Neighborhood.
3. .There is not a perceived need for addi-
tional C-2 development in this area.
4. The owner has proposed the rezoning
changes and it represents a reasonable
use of the property.
S. There is additional substantial vacant-
land.zoned in the Northeast Neighborhood.
Chairman Scott recognized Mr. Frank Adler who is an
adjacent property owner and a brief discussion ensued
as to the proposed rezoning and possible consequences.
if it were not developed as proposed.
Further discussion ensued as to the nature of the
proposed subdivision of single family lots and the
need for substantial permanent buffering along the
west perimeter of the development to protect the
single family properties.
Table Application No. 77011 Motion by Commissioner Jacobson, seconded by Com-
(Kenneth Bergstrom) missioner Kohrt to table Application No. 77011 sub-
mitted by Mr. Kenneth Bergstrom to permit the drafting
of a resolution recommending appropriate amendment
of the Comprehensive Plan and the scheduling of the
'necessary public hearing for that ame dment. The
/�{ �7 motion passed unanimously.
Member Robert Foreman introduced the following resolution RESOLUTION
moved its adoption: NO. 77-2
RE'SCLUTION RECOMMENDING AMENDMENT OF COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 66-295 (COMPREHENSIVE PLAN)
RyLI WIVE TO COMMERCIAL ZONED LAND IN SOUTHEAST
QUADRANT OF 69TH AND HUMBOLDT AVENUES NORTH
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution
Iwas duly seconded by member Patrick Horan, and upon
vote .being taken thereon, the following voted in favor
thereof: Cecilia Scott, Robert Foreman, Gilbert Engdahl,
Debra Jacobson, and Patrick Horan; and the following
i voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution
was declared duly passed and adopted.
-
I The next item of business was consideration of Application No. 77011
Application No. 77011 submitted by Kenneth Bergstrom. (Kenneth Bergstrom)
The Secretary stated the item had been considered at the
March 10 , 1977 and April 14, 1977 meetings. He stated
that the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group had
reviewed the matter and had recommended approval of
ti— rezoning. He briefly reviewed the application which
Woses rezoning, from C-2 to R-1 , of the approximate
.;ig�ftt acre parcel easterly of the Humboldt Square Shopping
Center. -
Chairman Scott noted that no one was present to speak..
for or against the application.
The Secretary briefly reviewed a draft resolution which
6 recommended approval of the application to the City
Council. A brief discussion ensued as to the findings
of this resolution and it was the consensus that the
resolution should make reference to the just adopted
Resolution No. 77-2. -
Meniber Robert Foreman.introduced the following resolution RESOLUTION
and moved its adoption: NO. 77-3
RESOLUTION REGARDING RECOMMENDED DISPOSITIOTI
CF APP-LICATION NO. 77011 SUBMITTED BY MR. KENNETH ,
BE RGSTROM
motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution
duly seconded by member Gilbert Engdahl, and upon
vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor
thereof: Cecilia Scott, Gilbert Engdahl, Patrick Horan,
Robert Foreman, and Debra Jacobson; and the following
voted against the S3Te: none, whereupon said resolution
was declared duly passed and adopted.
}
he Ci."y Manager introduced the next item of business, Planning Commission
1: of consideration of Planning Commission Application Application No. 77 12
7011 submitted by Kenneth Bergstrom. He stated (Kenneth Bergstrom
:hat the application comprehends the rezoning, from C-2
:o R-1 , of property located south of 69th Avenue North
-and east of the existing Humboldt Square Shopping Center.
He explained that as far back as 1961 this property,
along with the Humboldt Square Shopping Center property,
~tas been planned as a neighborhood shopping center
serving the northeast neighborhood of the City. He ,.
further explained that this site was so designated as
C-2 with the development of the Comprehensive Plan .
and Zoning Ordinance in the later '60's in accordance
,with stated policies of the Comprehensive Plan. He
reported that there have been numerous speculative pro-
posals regarding development of the property and that
most of these proposals have advocated a piecemeal type
of development, contrary to the guidelines of the
Comprehensive Plan. Thus, with the exception of the
development of the Humboldt Square Shopping Center,
this C-2 property has remained vacant. He added that
the proposal now before the City Council is to rezone
'Vemaining portion of the C-2 property to R-1 in order
to ,ventually develop single family homes.
The Director of Planning and Inspection proceeded to
further review Planning Commission Application No.
77011 and the Planning Commission action at its March 10,
April 14 , and May 12, 1977 meetings. He reported that
the Planning Commission on March 10, 1977 after
reviewing_the rezoning request had referred further
consideration of the matter to the Northeast Neighborhood
Advisory Committee for review and comment. He stated
that the Northeast Neighborhood" Advisory group had'
revie%'aed the request and were in favor of the rezoning.
He further stated that the Planning Commission at its
April 14, 1977 meeting had discussed the requested
rezoning and had determined that the Comprehensive
Plan must be amended prior to the rezoning action. He
explained that the Planning Commission had directed the
preparation of a draft resolution amending the Comprehensive
Flan and also the preparation of a draft resolution outlining
recommendation for approval of Planning Commission
+pica-ion No. 77011 based on the following: .
i
-
5-23-77
1. The Humboldt Square Shopping Center adequately
serves the northeast-neighborhood.
2. There is a need for additional R.-I. land ir. the
northeast neighborhood.
r
3. There is not a perceived need for additional C-2
development in this area.
4. The owner has proposed the rezoning changes and
its represents a reasonable use of the property.
S. There is additional substantial vacant land zoned
C-2 in the northeast neighborhood.
He further reported that the Planning Commission had also
discussed the need for a substantial permanent buffering
along the west perimeter of.the property to adequately
screen the single'family properties from the Humboldt
Square Shopping Center. He next reported that the
Planning Commission at its May 12, 1977 meeting had
adopted Resolution No. 77-2 recommending that the
City Council amend the Comprehensive Plan regarding
this area, and had also adopted Resolut on No. 77--3
which outlines the Commission's rationale for recom-
mending approval of the rezoning request.
The Director of Planning and Inspection next reviewed
- slides and a transparency showing the i cation and
configuration of the property in question, and a brief
discussion"ensued relative to the need f r screening the
Humboldt Square Shopping Center from p tential single
family homes. The Director of Planning and Inspection
stated that if the City Council favors the rezoning
request, the procedure to follow would be to first adopt
a resolution amending the Comprehensive Plan and then
take action-on the Planning Commission Application in
question.
Mayor Cohen commented that he has no roblem with
amending the*Comprehensive Plan or approving the
rezoning request, but that he is concerned that adequate
provisions be made to insure that the dev eloper is aware
of the Council's concern that there be substantial
screening to appropriately buffer the Humboldt Square
Shopping Center from any single family omes built on the
property.
The City Manager suggested, on the bass of past
incompatibilities between residential an commercial
interfaces, that the buffering between the shopping center
• and any single family homes be something substantial
such as a masonery walla He added that the type of
buffering would be something that the City Council would
want to carefully review no later than the, time the
developer submits a preliminary plat for the property.
Mayor Cohen stated that if proper cautions are not taken
prior to the rezoning, the City Council might find itself
in a position where it cannot provide ade uate screening
for the property. He added that he is aware that rozonina'
actions .cannot be conditioned, but pointed out that in tjct "
past the Council has requested preliminary site and
building plans;prior to rezoning actions so that'therc is i
A
'S' 3-23-77
no misunderstanding between the City Council and the
developer regarding exactly what is expected in
dc%°eloping.the property. He suggested that the City
C*ncil might want the 'developer to meet with the staff
over this matter of providing a positive buffering prior
to the next Council meeting at which time it could again
be considered.
Mayor Cohen recognized Mr. Murray, .who represented
the applicant. Mr. Murray stated that Mr. Bergstrom has
briefly discussed screening.the property with the Director
of Public Works and the Director of Planning and Inspection,
and is aware of the need but that he has not developed any
specific screening plans.
Following a brief discussion regarding-the procedure to Public Hearing
follow, Mayor Cohen opened the meeting for purposes of
a public hearing on a resolution amending Council
Resolution No. 66-295 (Comprehensive Plan) relative to
commercial zoned land in the southeast quadrant of 69th
and Humboldt Avenues North. No one spoke relating to
the resolution.
f Motion by Councilman Britts and seconded by Close Public
co.cilman Lhotka to close the public hearing relating Hearing.
to a resolution amending the Comprehensive Plan. Voting
in favor: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts and Lhotka.
Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously.
Further discussion ensued relative to the Comprehensive
Plan amendment, the rezoning request, and the need to
make provisions for adequate screening. The City
Manager suggested that the City Council consider the
screening question prior to any adoption of the amendment
and subsequent rezoning. lie explained that this would
give the developer an opportunity to present a screening
plan which "would support the rezoning concept.
Following a brief discussion there was,a motion by Action Continuing ,
Councilman Lhotka and seconded by Councilman Britts to Consideration of it '
continue the consideration of a resolution amending the Resolution Amending
Comprehensive Plan and to table Planning Commission the Comprehensive
Application No. 77011 submitted by Kenneth Bergstrom Plan and Tabling
until such time as the applicant submits a proposal to Planning Commission
the City Manager which shows positive buffering for the Application No. 7 011
p Wty in question.
Following further discussion a vote was taken on the
motion. Voting in favor: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen
Britts and Lhotka Voting against: none. The motion
Passed unanimously.
Member Robert Foreman introduced the following resolution and moved its
adoption:
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 77-2
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING AMENDMENT OF COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 66-295 (COMPREHENSIVE PLAN) RELATIVE
TO COMMERCIAL ZONED LAND IN SOUTHEAST QUADRANT
OF 69TH AND HUMBOLDT AVENUES NORTH
WHEREAS, the Council on November 7, 1966 adopted Resolution No. 66-295,
establishing the Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan, A Guide for Community
Development; and
WHEREAS, the Plan (at page 31) recommends, as a Goal for Commer ial
Development, that there be provided a centrally located neighborhood shopping
' center in each of the six residential neighborhoods , unless the residents are
adequately served by community or regional shopping centers located nearby; and
WHEREAS, the Plan (at pages 47 and 49) refers to and recommends the
resignation of land in the southeast'-quadrant of 69th and Humboldt Avenues North
Ls the location of such a shopping center for the Northeast Neighborhood; and
�' that single family deta hed
• WHEREAS, the Plan (at page 48) recommends g Y
housing be the predominant character of the Northeast Neighborhood; and
WHEREAS, the Commission has considered the above Plan recommendations
cry March 10, 1977, April 14, .1977, and May 12, 1977, to conjunction with
Application No. 77011 , submitted by the owner of the remaining vacant land at the
above location, requesting rezoning from C-2' (General Commerce) to R-1 (Single
Family Residential); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 35-202 of the City Ordinances, the
Commission held a duly called public hearing on May 12, 1977 to consider he
amendment of the Plan:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Brooklyn Center Planning Advisory
Commission to recommend to the City Council, pursuant to Chapter 35-202 of the
City Ordinances, that Council Resolution No. 66-2°S (Comprehensive Plan) be
amended to provide for the development of single-family housing on the remaining
developable land in the southeast quadrant of 69th and Humboldt Avenues North,
based upon the following findings:
1 . The Northeast Neighborhood is adequately served by shopping
g q ,
facilities both within and near the neighborhood.
•
- 2 The Comprehensive Plan designation of this area for future
development as a neighborhood shopping center has been
satisfied with the existing retail center.
RESOLUTION NO. 77-2
3. There is substantial vacant commercial land elsewhere in
the Northeast Neighborhood.
4. The owner has initiated a rezoning, from C-2 (General
Commerce) to R-1 (Single Family Residential), of the
approximate eight acre parcel described as Lot 2, Block 1 ,
Hi Crest Square Addition.
S. The proposed use represents a reasonable use of the land
and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan development
goal for the Northeast Neighborhood.
_May 12, 1977
Date Chairman
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member Patrick. Horan, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted
in favor thereof: Cecilia Scott, Robert Foreman, Gilbert Engdahl, Debra Jacobson,
and Patrick Horan; and the following voted against the same: hone, whereupon
• said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
F
Member Robert Foreman introduced the following resolution and mo ed its
adoption:
x
PLANNING`COMMISSION
+ RESOLUTION NO. 77-3
. i
RESOLUTION REGARDING RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION OF
APPLICATION NO. 77011 SUBMITTED BY MR. KENNETH
-BERGSTROM
r
WHEREAS, Application No. 77011 submitted by Kenneth Bergstrom proposes
rAtzoning, from C-2 (Generai Commerce) to R-I ,(Single Family Residential), of
property in the southeast quadrant of 69th and Humboldt Avenues North described
as Lot 2 , Block 1 , Hi Crest Square Addition; and
WHEREAS, the Commission held a duly called public hearing on March 10,
1977 when testimony regarding the request was taken; and
WHEREAS, the item was referred to the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory
Group which, in minutes of a,meeting on March 22, 1977, recommended the rezoning;
and
WHEREAS, the Commission further considered the matter on April 14, 1977
.` and on /fay 12, 1977 when a public hearing was held to consider apprgpria e
amendments of the Comprehensive Plan goals for this area:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Brooklyn Center Planning Advisory
Commission to recommend. to the City Council that Application No: 77011 submitted
by Kenneth Bergstrom be approved in consideration of the following:
1 . There is a need for additional R-1 zoned land in the Northeast
Neighborhood, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan
recommendation that single family residential development. be
the predominant characteristic of this neighborhood.
2. The existing Humboldt Square retail center adequately serves
the Neighborhood as a centrally located shopping center.
3 There is no perceived need for additional C-2 development in
l
this area. I
4.. The owner has proposed the zoning change which represents
a reasonable use classification of the property.
_ S. The Commission, pursuant to Chapter 3S-202, has recommended
appropriate amendment of the Comprehensive Plan goals for this
area in Commission Resolution No. 77-2.
I
i
RESOLUTIQN NO. -77-
May 12, 1977
Chairman'
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member Gilbert Engdahl, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted
in favor thereo.`.: Cecilia Scott, Gilbert Engdahi, Robert Foreman, Debra Jacobson;
and Patri# Horan; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon
said resolution was declared duly.passed and adopted.
Y
`i �'• 1 a r, PARK'
Is
EVERGREEN
z� a SCHOOL
1p
cr
�..
g i
W
— 1 >La
CITY —
�. 1. MAINTENANCE
FINE r c
( EMER r ANc R ANNEX
?
R4, c2 v d i 4 7 WATT R TOWER '
Tr rROAD F3. 13L
l \ff
>�
a`
&meft 5.
.�' . u
o 5 _ z
97 r
4 i--
! - - fie :. - -
z.= BROOKLYN CENTER z
HIGH SCHOOL_
: . FIRE_HOUSE
er
PAR
La
(,"" z`. FIRE
FPEE*AY BLVD. 6 ,� , � 6E JA
AVE 1 Mi.
a ►( . t -- _
6 W _
a
t
Planning Coniission Information Sheet
Application No. 7900?
Appl-cant:. Janis Blumentals for B.C.I .P.
Location: Approximately 0-7th Avenue and -Shingle Creek Parkway
Request: Site and Building Plan Approval
The applicant is seeking site and building plan approval for an approximata 85,000
sq. ft. Speculative 'industrial Building at approximately 67th Avenue North and
Shingle Creek Parkway. The building is to be located cn a proposed approximate
S acre site on the northern portion of a large tract (Tract B, R.L.S. 1405
located north of Freeway Boulevard and westerly of Shingle Creek Parkway., just
east of the MTC site and Shingle Creek.
The applicant has submitted a proposed conceptual master plan for this. lar e
tract including a layout for additional speculative industrial buildings. The
place comprehends the updating of Shingle Creek Parkway to a divided four
lane facility similar in design to Shingle Creek Parkway located south of the
Freeway. Construction for the upgrading of Shingle .Creek Parkway is proposed for
• 1979.
The applicant proposes to provide for 141 cars, which comprehends parking meeting
the ordinance formula for 10% of the building being used for office space
assoti:ated with the :ndustrial uses. He has presented a Proof of Parking v.,hich
shows an additional 90 stalls could be provided which would allow 391 of the
building to be used for office space. The site plan also indicates an area south
of the building to be used in conjunction with a cross easement for proposed
fulture speculative office buildings to the south. He proposes a berming treat-
ment with Mackberry and Spruce trees on the graestrip along S111 iny1L Creek Parkway.
The exterior of the building is a concrete decorative block of earth tones.
The property in question wo!+ld be subject to replatting prior to further develop-
ment of this area. Tie applicant has also been informed of the potential need
for an Environmental Assessment or approval or permits for possible future de-.
velopment in the vicinity of Shingle Creek.
Approval of this application should be subject to at least the following conditions:
1 . The building plans are subject to review and approval by the
Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to
the issuance of permits.
2, . rading_, .dra=nage, utilit/ and landscaping plans are subject
to review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the
issuance of permits.
3, A Performance Agreement and supporting financial guarantee
(in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be
submitted to assure completion of approved site improvements.
4. The building shall be equipped with an automatic fire
extinguishing system to meet NFPA Standard No. 13 and shall
S be connected to an approved central monitoring system in
accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances.
S. Any outside trash disposal equipment and/or rooftop mechanical
equipment shall be appropriately screened from view.
l-1 l-79
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Page 2 - Application Sao. 79002
5. All landscaped areas shall be equipped with an underground
irrigation as approved by the City Engineer.
7. The property shall be putted in accordance with Chapter 15 of
the City Ordinances.
0, r n c. ek cr t; L'ti
ILLy� // W ' Lvt-t�C'_�-`� C.v OK-c..' ' '' .�I.L`yy�-f�. �JB-c� ��� � - �•
1-11-79
, ""' `-•
,. A A k
INC
7Lq
-17
R5`"•a;
CITY —
r MAINTENANCE
BUILDING
, ... '! y .....».... SHINGLE GREEK PARKWY/�/
APPLICATION NO.
79002
OPEN SPACE AVE
ou
a
Y
'O
U
�\ \ .y`IeQ FREEWAY BLVD.
CENTRAL
a yr
rArR
---- PROPOSED ROADWAYS
PROPOSED BRIDGES
Y CAREEN -%CITY
'"�,� PARK I r o
q
t
Planning Commission Infcrmation Sheet
Application No. 79003
Applicant: Harold J. Westin & Associates
Location: 6845 Lee Avenue North (Group Health Clinic)
Request: Site and Building Plan Approval
The applicant is seeking site and building plan approval for an approximate 7,700
sq.i ft. addition to the Group Health Clinic located at 6845 Lee Avenue North.
The original site and building plans were approved by the City Council under Appli-
cation No. 74050 in October, 1974.
With the addition the applicant is proposing the construction of an additional
parking lot primarily for staff purposes to be located south of the building.
Presently the clinic has parking for 99 cars. With the addition, a total of 164
parking spaces are required according to the ordinance formula for medical and
dental uses (1 stall per 150 sq. ft.) .
The applicant proposes to retain as many existing trees as possible on the site
and shows a landscaped treatment retaining these trees between parking are s in
the new lot. He has also proposed additional landscaping including bermin anu
a continuation of existing trees along Noble Avenue, berming along the south
portion of the property and trees and plantings along a previously untreated
area along Lee Avenue North. The exterior treatment to the addition is a precast
concrete to match the existing structure.
We met with the applicant last Friday and requested certain revisions. We will
be prepared to review the plans in more detail at Thursday evening's meeting. b
Approval of this application should be subject to at least the following 1
conditions:
1 . Building plans are z3ubject to review and approval by the Building
Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance
of permits.
_Z. Grading, drainage, utility and landscape plans are subject to
review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance
of permits.
3. A Performance Aareement and supporting financial guarantee (in
an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitte
to assure the completion of approved site improvements.
4. The building addition shall be equipped with an automatic fire
extinguishing system to meet NFPA Standard No. 13 and shall be .
connected to an approved central monitoring device in accordance
with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances..
5. Any outside trash disposal equipment and/or rooftop mechanical
equipment shall be appropriately screened from view.
6.. The underground irrigation system shall *be extended to all
landscaped areas as approved by the City Engineer.
1-11-79
�ta����■�■ 11�i1Ar
W�WWW -
'�..■.nunuu�:
-WILLOW LANIE-
,milli, Mumon,
MA
IN